New NESes, ideas, development, etc

[flyingchicken]

Who here often calls physicians "physicians" and not "doctors?"

Wrong thread, sorry.

Unspam: Do shows like House translate to written stories well?

 

[zxcvbnm]

I think it's horribly biased. Clearly, you haven't been reading enough socialist writing. Read the first half of Animal Farm, stop at the attack of the farmers; you will see that the gloriously glorified glorious revolution is a good system.

Socialism still lurks about in third world developing countries because the USSR "did it wrong" so the gloriously glorified glory og glorious socialism can still be applied in modern NESes.

Those are applied on the basis of what has been the most functioning system. Socialist systems have always been dependant of the military to keep them running, and those are more of the UN development goals etc. which have shown that when they have been successfully established the societies can be considered to have improved.

 

[das]

What would you make of places like, say, Singapore?

 

[zxcvbnm]

Between stages 1 and 2. Some, like Respect for Laws and Religious Freedom established but others not established. Electoral Rule and Human Rights are borderline, perhaps they could be split to a couple of different aspects and Freedom of Speech added.

 

[flyingchicken]

So you're saying that if we apply a particularly Western template to a an Eastern cultural setting, there will be no conflict with several thousands of years of establishment and progress is inevitable?

 

[zxcvbnm]

So you're saying that if we apply a particularly Western template to a an Eastern cultural setting, there will be no conflict with several thousands of years of establishment and progress is inevitable?

No. I'm not saying that. Establishing those aspects would be very expensive and take a long time, but on the long term it's a worthy investment. Or can you tell any nations where establishing those aspects (really incorporating them to the culture and not just saying "we have it") would have had negative effects? I tried to make them quite universal in that sense, to avoid western patronising.

 

[das]

Between stages 1 and 2. Some, like Respect for Laws and Religious Freedom established but others not established. Electoral Rule and Human Rights are borderline, perhaps they could be split to a couple of different aspects and Freedom of Speech added.

My point is that your system leaves out a lot of important points (not sure about exact terminology, but Singapore does have major achievements with regards to the problems of crime, drugs and pollution, precisely thanks to not caring about human rights quite so much as some others), but if we add them it won't really work quite so "neatly" as otherwise.

Possibly it might be reworked along the lines of SymNES II values (new "issues" become available on higher levels of advancement, but it is possible to choose between two extremes and options in between as the exact policy on the issue). Societal advances, after all, do not really work like technological ones; both cultural and human factors become much more significant, and arguably modern technology isn't quite as adaptive in nature as it used to be - something that applies in a considerably lesser extent to human societies.

 

[zxcvbnm]

My point is that your system leaves out a lot of important points (not sure about exact terminology, but Singapore does have major achievements with regards to the problems of crime, drugs and pollution, precisely thanks to not caring about human rights quite so much as some others), but if we add them it won't really work quite so "neatly" as otherwise.

Human Rights effects: "...makes certain authoritarian actions impossible"

I have though of several possible outcomes of these. And of course it's not only about saying "we have them" or even declaring them, as I said, establishing them so that they and their use are deeply inbuilt to the society.

Possibly it might be reworked along the lines of SymNES II values (new "issues" become available on higher levels of advancement, but it is possible to choose between two extremes and options in between as the exact policy on the issue). Societal advances, after all, do not really work like technological ones; both cultural and human factors become much more significant, and arguably modern technology isn't quite as adaptive in nature as it used to be - something that applies in a considerably lesser extent to human societies.

That might be another possibility. Depends on the level of complexity wanted.

 

[das]

I have though of several possible outcomes of these. And of course it's not only about saying "we have them" or even declaring them, as I said, establishing them so that they and their use are deeply inbuilt to the society.

Thing is, some of the societal values/developments/achievements/whatever you call them may be incompatible, at least as far as we are talking about this degree of implementation, especially inasmuch as one or two values will inevitably have to take precedence. That's something you might want to incorporate.

That might be another possibility. Depends on the level of complexity wanted.

Given that NESes are generally meant to focus on societal development (at least, more on societal development than on technological development), it seems fitting that societal development should be generally be portrayed in a more complex way.

 

[zxcvbnm]

Thing is, some of the societal values/developments/achievements/whatever you call them may be incompatible, at least as far as we are talking about this degree of implementation, especially inasmuch as one or two values will inevitably have to take precedence. That's something you might want to incorporate.

Any examples of them being like that?

How Singapore would function:
They have developed Respect for Law, but if they'd develop Human Rights they couldn't mass-spend public IC to "force" those developments like Environmental Concern.

 

[flyingchicken]

Does it really make sense to use industrial capacity to force things like?

 

[zxcvbnm]

Government programs, the original idea was development aid (direct translation, whatsitcalled) so that governments could use some of their resources to help others establish those.

There is no money in most NESes, just IC

 

[das]

You see, I think there might be some confusion here. Are those supposed to be social achievements (like programs and such) or societal values? It seems to be the latter, in which case industrial points seem really irrelevant.

There is no money in most NESes, just IC

SP, actually.

Any examples of them being like that?

A classic would have to be a choice between Free Market and Concern for Environment. Oh, you could and usually would have both, but one of them still will have to get priority over the other. Think of it this way: in the event of contention between those two values, which would usually be the overriding concern? Will environmental concerns override the freedom of enterprise, or vice versa?

Also, things like Human Rights\Respect for Law. Religious tolerance (though it doesn't seem to be singled out; incidentally, no, it isn't a requirement for the status of a developed nation at all) might sometimes clash with the idea of Human Rights too. I am sure there are many other examples.

Looking back on your list I think it could really use some additional fleshing out, and I also suspect that the dichotomy between developed and developing nations is really useless here. Still, it could certainly add to the experience.

 

[flyingchicken]

Maybe this can be more useful as a "developing description" "stat" rather than a straight line of "progress," especially for post-apocalyptic or fresh start settings, and maybe era-specific settings. Id est, a society can't just jump to something fully fleshed out and developed at the start of the NES--the player has to make choices at controlled crucial points (at intervals, limited player-induced, or moderator-induced).

Of course, several branches have to be made, and the tree has to be very exhaustive if the setting spans more than on era.

 

[zxcvbnm]

You see, I think there might be some confusion here. Are those supposed to be social achievements (like programs and such) or societal values? It seems to be the latter, in which case industrial points seem really irrelevant.

They are achievements in establishing core values and aspects of societies.

A classic would have to be a choice between Free Market and Concern for Environment. Oh, you could and usually would have both, but one of them still will have to get priority over the other. Think of it this way: in the event of contention between those two values, which would usually be the overriding concern? Will environmental concerns override the freedom of enterprise, or vice versa?

That would be up to the player to decide. But if one overruns the other too often one might lose the established aspect, or risk dissent.

Also, things like Human Rights\Respect for Law. Religious tolerance (though it doesn't seem to be singled out; incidentally, no, it isn't a requirement for the status of a developed nation at all) might sometimes clash with the idea of Human Rights too. I am sure there are many other examples.

Respect of Law is the idea that breaking the laws isn't commonplace and corruption doesn't thrive. Human rights mean that laws honour them along with the actions of the majority.

Looking back on your list I think it could really use some additional fleshing out, and I also suspect that the dichotomy between developed and developing nations is really useless here. Still, it could certainly add to the experience.

Those differences are a bit simplified and made in about 5 minutes, so it does need some improvement.

 

[das]

Respect of Law is the idea that breaking the laws isn't commonplace and corruption doesn't thrive. Human rights mean that laws honour them along with the actions of the majority.

That's all fine, but the question is, what is more important - the national laws or the human rights? They do intersect often enough, but not always. And then there's the matter of punishment...

But if one overruns the other too often one might lose the established aspect, or risk dissent.

Possible in some instances, but far from self-apparent.

 

[zxcvbnm]

That's all fine, but the question is, what is more important - the national laws or the human rights? They do intersect often enough, but not always. And then there's the matter of punishment...

If both Respect for Law and Human Rights are established, it means that the national laws respect Human Rights too.

(Except in some rarer cases, see "Unbroken Rights" for those, so basically the US would have Respect for Law and Human Rights, but not Unbroken Rights)

 

[das]

And if the national laws sometimes agree with human rights and sometimes don't? What about partial establishment, which is really far more plausible in most real world situations?

 

[zxcvbnm]

And if the national laws sometimes agree with human rights and sometimes don't? What about partial establishment, which is really far more plausible in most real world situations?

Unbroken Rights is for the cases where the establishment isn't partial. But the idea is that the laws fulfill the basic ideas of human rights for about 99.9%

of course, the player would have the power to interpret this, but if the laws cleary break them then Empowered Citizenry will get the government to bad trouble.

 

[Dachs]

SP, actually.

Nay - EP!

Where the devil do you people get "IC"?